@Mazelit_ I’m glad KK stands with the Jewish community, but there is no hate speech exception to the First Amendment. We need to oppose bigoted speech with better arguments.
@SpoonMechanism@TommyBeer This is a team that has brought a lot of people (including me, a lifelong Knicks fan!) a ton of joy and hope.
They have definitely earned their slices.
@ASFleischman He has an SS tattoo, rails against Israel often, and named his penis after Hitler. Clearly he has no Nazi sympathies and people concerned he might are just nit picking.
If we aren’t going to give politicians like Platner benefit of the doubt, who will we give it to?
@mynamehear I would be very surprised if the candidate with the nazi SS tattoo that named his penis after Hitler and campaigns against Israel turned out to be Jewish and moderate.
The Knicks are donating hundreds of NBA Finals tickets to underprivileged New York kids.
The Garden of Dreams Foundation Youth will receive 250 tickets per home game, totaling at least 500 tickets across Games 3 and 4—and 750 tickets if there is a Game 6.
@KevinPaulMoritz@J_D_Sarfati3@megbasham@secularprolife Many, many people don’t value an embryo fertilized 10 seconds ago equally to the rights of full fledged human women.
You ignore that pregnancy can be very dangerous for some of those women. Life threatening in fact.
I don’t need your politeness. Mine isn’t conditional.
@KevinPaulMoritz@J_D_Sarfati3@megbasham@secularprolife Sure. Or it’s a polite way of saying someone is wrong. He says his position is the only one backed by science. It plainly is not.
I respect the sincerity to which he and others hold the conception position. And appreciate his good faith.
@J_D_Sarfati3@megbasham I bring up faith not to argue from a faith position but to demonstrate that there is no consensus. There are Jews, Muslims, Christians, atheists, agnostics, etc. who all feel differently about the question.
@J_D_Sarfati3@megbasham Your position is not the only one backed by science. Sperm cells are also human and living. Why not draw the line there? My point is not that one line is better than the other, but that there are decisions to be made that involve more than the biological questions.
@J_D_Sarfati3@megbasham It isn’t prejudice against the unborn. That is just your preferred spin. The debate isn’t really over when it’s life, it’s when is it human. And more specific when is it human such that our policy should protecting it over the freedoms of the mother. Reasonable minds disagree.
@J_D_Sarfati3@megbasham Humanity begins at conception is hotly contested as the fetus is still 100% dependent on someone else at that point. Others argue that it should be recognized at the point of a heartbeat or at birth.
Unlike the examples you give, none of those lines are drawn from prejudice.